Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-10 Thread Yuyang Du
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:10:21AM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > > > 2. If m < 32*64, the chance to be here is very very low, but if so, > > > > > > Should that be: n < 32*64 ? Sorry, I overlooked this comment. Yes, it should be n < 32*64. > > > > > > Talking about 32*64, I don't get why

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-10 Thread Yuyang Du
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:10:21AM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > > > 2. If m < 32*64, the chance to be here is very very low, but if so, > > > > > > Should that be: n < 32*64 ? Sorry, I overlooked this comment. Yes, it should be n < 32*64. > > > > > > Talking about 32*64, I don't get why

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-10 Thread Morten Rasmussen
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 02:19:32AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > Hi Morten, > > On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 12:13:10PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > > > integer can

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-10 Thread Morten Rasmussen
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 02:19:32AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > Hi Morten, > > On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 12:13:10PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > > > integer can

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Yuyang Du
Hi Morten, On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 12:13:10PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > > integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) > > days. > >

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Yuyang Du
Hi Morten, On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 12:13:10PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > > integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) > > days. > >

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Vincent Guittot
Hi Morten, On 5 May 2016 at 13:13, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: >> In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned >> integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) >>

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Vincent Guittot
Hi Morten, On 5 May 2016 at 13:13, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: >> In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned >> integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) >> days. >> >> For usual cases,

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Morten Rasmussen
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) > days. > > For usual cases, 32bit is big enough and 64bit is needless. But if > a task sleeps

Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-05 Thread Morten Rasmussen
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 04:02:44AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned > integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) > days. > > For usual cases, 32bit is big enough and 64bit is needless. But if > a task sleeps

[PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-03 Thread Yuyang Du
In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) days. For usual cases, 32bit is big enough and 64bit is needless. But if a task sleeps longer than it, there can be two outcomes: Consider a task sleeps

[PATCH v3 03/12] sched/fair: Change the variable to hold the number of periods to 32bit

2016-05-03 Thread Yuyang Du
In sched average update, a period is about 1ms, so a 32-bit unsigned integer can approximately hold a maximum of 49 (=2^32/1000/3600/24) days. For usual cases, 32bit is big enough and 64bit is needless. But if a task sleeps longer than it, there can be two outcomes: Consider a task sleeps